Poor choice, but not everything he said was entirely wrong; our role as a peacemaker is indeed compromised by the fact that we pretty much back one particular side, even a retard could figure that out, and why that observation would shock anyone is a mystery. There's plenty of other stuff that's completely beyond the pale, though, indidcating his personal opinions would tilt the axis of any organizaton he ran out of kilter with stated US policy.
In general I don't like putting the intelligence community through ideological purity tests, the whole idea that we have to be lily-white about everything we do in the black world, and it has been a ****ing disaster since we started doing things that way back around the Ford/Carter era, a stupidity in which even the Reagan administration participated. Intel ops should be handled by the most pragmatic, cynical, no-holds-barred, and smartest bastards available, not the most ideologically-pure and law-abiding people out of those already in the intel field. It doesn't bother me at all to use dirty to get the dirtier, or to just plain kill bad guys instead of trying to put them on public trial.